BoyFromAus
New member
Fadi, what about myostatin. Would you say it's something exaggerated or does it play a major role in limiting people from developing more muscle?
Of course I have had tremendous success with this. Extensive consumption of expensive supplements, like the consumption of several kilograms of meat each day, is absolutely necessary to be able to get any results at all. Just ask those pencil-necked geek, Sandow, Hackenschmidt, Grimek, and Steve Reeves. Pussies.
Macros are important, too. Also if you don't consume a protein shake within 3 minutes of the end of your workout it was completely wasted. They work especially well in combination with split routines and BUCKETLOADS OF STEROIDS.
Honest.
Ahem Reeves at his best ain't a pussy......
One of the all time best drug free dudes.
Fadi, what about myostatin. Would you say it's something exaggerated or does it play a major role in limiting people from developing more muscle?
heres another question, is a Steve Reeves physique achievable for your average joe??
Rasika, I've written a whole article on the subject called OK Drugs! remember? I don't think Rob has seen it though, so here it is...
http://ausbb.com/bodybuilding-training-discussions/9230-ok-drugs.html
Fadi.
I apologize first for only reading the original post, so if someone has already said this, I'm sorry.
The only limiting factor is the mind. For a muscle to get bigger, we need to give it a reason to grow. You can trick it for a while with different angles and assorted exercises, but the single best way is to keep increasing the weight used.
Its very easy to measure, very easy to do. As long as the mind is willing. If you have 20 years of logs, you can easily track back and see how much your squat has increased. If you only add 1kg per month, and you started with 60kg, you should be up to 300kg after 240 months. Thats only adding 0.04gms per day.
Next is diet. If you injest 3600 calories a day when you start at 80kg, this needs to keep increasing.At 110kg that number should be 4725 calories per day, and so on.
Progressive resistance followed by progressive eating knows no boundaries. Sure you will slow up, but you wont stop. The rate of progress definitely slows, but the progression of weight stops for most lifters after a handful of years.
I was there when a lifter called Adam Coe did his first squat, I was also there when he squatted 350kg, he simply kept adding weight and eating more, moving to a solid 100kg +
Most get derailed with fancy routines, softer options, because it gets too hard. Damn right it gets hard, thats why its so rewarding, coz very few ever keep increasing weights after 5 years, or they switch to easier exercises.
I have pics in my Strength Journals of Jesse Marunde as a kid lifting. A decade later he finished second in the WSM competition.
Progressive resistance on the big lifts followed by proggresive eating will keep you improving.
Anyone can feel free to show me how they kept increasing the poundage used on the squat for 20 years followed by big eating and then demonstrate that they didnt keep growing.
It never happened.
Genetic potential is an interesting concept. Could a natural athlete (and when i say natural, i mean 100% natural, not using 'sort of' steroids) eventually get to the size of Markus Rhul
Maybe. When i say maybe i really do mean maybe. Maybe after 20'ish years of solid serious training, eating, supplementation, cardio & dedication. That is of course not to say that vador has been piss farting around for the last 20 years.
Maybe genetic potential of what can be acheived over the span of 20 (for example) years has something to do with when you start. What if you started when you were 12? 15 years old? 20? What we do has a lot (read mostly) to do with hormone production. Things like testosterone, Growth Hormone, Insulin & Cholesterol. At the tender age of 12, these hormones are created in larger doses than when your 20.
what does everyone think
So there's obviously a gap, a point somewhere that means your genetic potential stops & a glass ceiling is in place. After all, we're created with physical limits. Possibly somebody's discussed in this thread about the running of the mile myth & 100m sprint myth. Will anybody EVER be able to run 100m in 9 seconds & to be drug free ? I absolutely dont believe that all olympic athletes are drug free. Heck, with the amount of money on the table, why wouldn't you ? To me, for every person putting together a test to spot gear, there's 3 people working a way around it
</rant
So there's obviously a gap, a point somewhere that means your genetic potential stops & a glass ceiling is in place. After all, we're created with physical limits. Possibly somebody's discussed in this thread about the running of the mile myth & 100m sprint myth. Will anybody EVER be able to run 100m in 9 seconds & to be drug free ? I absolutely dont believe that all olympic athletes are drug free. Heck, with the amount of money on the table, why wouldn't you ? To me, for every person putting together a test to spot gear, there's 3 people working a way around it
</rant
This situation always gets me thinking about the law of diminishing returns.
How badly do you want those extra gains and how much more will you have to do to get them.
Once you really reach a certain level, is the increased effort required (on top of what you're already doing) to keep improving, worth the minor gains?
If you are a regular guy with a life and not competing, I would think not.